NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Max-Q vs Lisuan Tech LX PRO Comparison

NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Max-Q and Lisuan Tech LX PRO occupy opposite ends of the mobile and desktop graphics spectrum. The RTX 4050 Max-Q is a 35 W integrated-class part for thin laptops, while the LX PRO is a 225 W dual-slot desktop card. The database shows both at the 50th percentile, but their raw capabilities and design goals diverge sharply.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 4050 Max-Q wins in power efficiency and portability. Its 35 W TDP and IGP slot width mean it requires no power connectors and fits into ultra-thin chassis. The LX PRO, at 225 W, demands a 550 W recommended PSU and a 1x 16-pin connector, making it unsuitable for mobile use. The 4050 Max-Q targets mainstream laptops where battery life and thermals matter more than absolute frame rates.

The LX PRO wins on raw throughput. Its FP32 of 24.58 TFLOPS is nearly triple the 4050 Max-Q's 8.218 TFLOPS. The LX PRO also has 24 GB memory versus 6 GB, a 192-bit bus versus 96-bit, and 432.0 GB/s bandwidth versus 192.0 GB/s. For large datasets, high-resolution textures, or compute workloads, the LX PRO dominates. Its 6144 shading units, 192 TMUs, and 96 ROPs dwarf the 4050 Max-Q's 2560, 80, and 48 respectively.

The 4050 Max-Q counters with Ada Lovelace features. It has 20 RT cores and 80 tensor cores, enabling hardware ray tracing and DLSS. The LX PRO lists no RT or tensor cores, so its architecture lacks dedicated acceleration for those tasks. The 4050 Max-Q also supports Vulkan 1.4, while the LX PRO stops at 1.3.

Architecture Differences

The process nodes differ: the 4050 Max-Q uses TSMC 5 nm, the LX PRO uses TSMC 6 nm. The 4050 Max-Q's chip, AD107, packs 18,900 million transistors into 159 mm², yielding 118.9M / mm² density. The LX PRO's 7G105 chip has unknown transistor count and die size, so density cannot be compared.

Memory configurations diverge completely. The 4050 Max-Q has 6 GB GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus at 16 Gbps effective. The LX PRO has 24 GB GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus at 18 Gbps effective. The LX PRO's bandwidth advantage, 432.0 GB/s versus 192.0 GB/s, comes from both higher speed and wider bus.

Compute ratios differ. The 4050 Max-Q runs FP16 at 8.218 TFLOPS, a 1:1 ratio with FP32. The LX PRO runs FP16 at 49.15 TFLOPS, a 2:1 ratio, meaning it doubles FP32 throughput in half-precision workloads. This suggests the LX PRO is tuned for AI or FP16 compute, while the 4050 Max-Q treats both equally.

The 4050 Max-Q is an IGP with no power connectors and PCIe 4.0 x8. The LX PRO is a dual-slot card with one 16-pin connector and PCIe 4.0 x16, doubling the interface bandwidth for host communication. Display outputs also differ: the 4050 Max-Q is portable-device dependent, while the LX PRO provides four DisplayPort 1.4a outputs.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows no direct benchmark scores for either card, so comparisons rest on specification-derived rates. The LX PRO achieves 24.58 TFLOPS FP32, exactly 3.0 times the 4050 Max-Q's 8.218 TFLOPS. That translates to roughly triple the raw shading throughput.

Texture rate: the LX PRO reaches 384.0 GTexel/s versus 128.4 GTexel/s, a 2.99x advantage. Pixel rate: 192.0 GPixel/s versus 77.04 GPixel/s, a 2.49x lead. These ratios show the LX PRO scales across all rasterization stages, though ROP scaling is less dramatic than shader scaling.

Memory bandwidth: 432.0 GB/s versus 192.0 GB/s, a 2.25x difference. This narrower gap means the LX PRO's memory system is relatively weaker than its compute, potentially bottlenecking heavy bandwidth workloads. The 4050 Max-Q's 96-bit bus is the limiting factor, but the LX PRO's 192-bit bus at 18 Gbps still cannot match its own FP32 ratio.

FP16: the LX PRO's 49.15 TFLOPS is 5.98x the 4050 Max-Q's 8.218 TFLOPS. This is the largest single ratio, confirming the LX PRO's FP16 focus. For mixed-precision workloads, the gap widens substantially.

The 4050 Max-Q has no advantage in any computational metric. Its wins are structural: 35 W TDP, IGP form factor, no connectors, and Ada-specific features. The LX PRO has 20 RT cores and 80 tensor cores absent; the 4050 Max-Q's 20 and 80 respectively are purely additional capabilities.

FAQ

Q: Which card has higher raw FP32 performance?

A: The Lisuan Tech LX PRO delivers 24.58 TFLOPS FP32, exactly 3.0 times the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Max-Q's 8.218 TFLOPS.

Q: How does memory capacity differ?

A: The LX PRO has 24 GB GDDR6 on a 192-bit bus with 432.0 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX 4050 Max-Q has 6 GB GDDR6 on a 96-bit bus with 192.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Does the RTX 4050 Max-Q support hardware ray tracing?

A: Yes, it includes 20 RT cores and 80 tensor cores. The LX PRO lists no RT or tensor cores in the database.

Q: What is the power requirement difference?

A: The RTX 4050 Max-Q has a 35 W TDP, IGP slot width, and no power connectors. The LX PRO has a 225 W TDP, dual-slot width, requires a 1x 16-pin connector, and a 550 W suggested PSU.

Q: Which card has a newer process node?

A: The RTX 4050 Max-Q uses TSMC 5 nm. The LX PRO uses TSMC 6 nm. The 4050 Max-Q's node is smaller.

Q: How do FP16 rates compare?

A: The LX PRO reaches 49.15 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1 ratio), which is 5.98x the RTX 4050 Max-Q's 8.218 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio).

Q: What is the bus interface difference?

A: The RTX 4050 Max-Q uses PCIe 4.0 x8. The LX PRO uses PCIe 4.0 x16, doubling the available host bandwidth.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The LX PRO has 6144 shading units. The RTX 4050 Max-Q has 2560, a 2.4x difference.

The Verdict

The data indicates the Lisuan Tech LX PRO is the performance leader across every measured computational metric. It triples FP32 throughput, nearly triples texture rate, doubles pixel rate, and offers quadruple the memory capacity. Its 24 GB buffer and 432.0 GB/s bandwidth suit large workloads. The 225 W TDP and dual-slot design confirm it as a desktop-class card.

The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Max-Q wins where power and size matter. At 35 W with IGP form factor and no connectors, it fits where the LX PRO cannot. Its Ada Lovelace architecture brings dedicated RT and tensor cores, and Vulkan 1.4 support. The 5 nm process node is denser than the LX PRO's 6 nm.

The choice depends on use case. For static desktop rendering or FP16 compute, the LX PRO's 49.15 TFLOPS FP16 and 6144 cores dominate. For portable laptops, battery-operated systems, or ray-traced workloads with DLSS, the RTX 4050 Max-Q's feature set and power envelope are decisive. The LX PRO cannot substitute for the 4050 Max-Q's mobility, and the 4050 Max-Q cannot match the LX PRO's raw throughput.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Max-Q | Lisuan Tech LX PRO |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | Ada Lovelace | TrueGPU |

| Process Node | 5 nm | 6 nm |

| Chip | AD107 | 7G105 |

| Transistors | 18,900 million | unknown |

| Die Size | 159 mm² | unknown |

| Memory Size | 6 GB | 24 GB |

| Memory Bus | 96 bit | 192 bit |

| Memory Speed | 16 Gbps effective | 18 Gbps effective |

| Bandwidth | 192.0 GB/s | 432.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2560 | 6144 |

| TMUs | 80 | 192 |

| ROPs | 48 | 96 |

| RT Cores | 20 | null |

| Tensor Cores | 80 | null |

| Pixel Rate | 77.04 GPixel/s | 192.0 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 128.4 GTexel/s | 384.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 8.218 TFLOPS | 24.58 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | 8.218 TFLOPS (1:1) | 49.15 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 35 W | 225 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 16-pin |

| Suggested PSU | null | 550 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.3 |

| Dimensions | null | 248 mm 9.8 inches, 118 mm 4.6 inches, 48 mm 1.9 inches |